If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. Registration is $1 to post on this forum. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I can try the standard SF firmware equivalent of 1.3.2 which is 3.3.0. I've been reluctant to upgrade, but I'll give it a shot tonight.

I did get a freeze and blue screen with the Mushkin as the system drive, but I think it was me trying to use the system and install some drivers while endurance testing.

B.A.T.,

The great thing about SB processors is that they all idle around the same. A 2600K and the lowest-end dual core Celeron 2.4 G530 pretty much use the same power at idle. For a while, my 2500K was running at it's lowest idle frequency for about 15 hrs (on accident, through some Asus power saving software) and I didn't even notice. Both of my systems now are virtually silent (tiny apartment + loud system = sleepless nights), and so I'm thinking about future plans for another drive to test.

That is AS-SSD access time, which is measured with 512B IOs, not 4KiB.

Yup, but i feel that it is telling of latency regardless. Main reason I linked the 4K from the other site is that they were actually using true 4K results, which is rare with those drives unfortunately. The V3 writes are a bit better though, nice point.

Originally Posted by johnw

You have to be careful with Tom's IOMeter data. Some of the data in their reviews is labeled as QD1, but it really is not (for example, they give 100+ MB/s 4KB QD1 reads, which is absurd). I think the problem is that they set IOMeter for QD1 but also start up 4 or 8 or more worker threads. Each worker thread may only let one IO queue up, but since the worker threads are submitting IOs in parallel, the queue fills up higher than 1 anyway. I think the only thing that should be labeled QD1 is when there is only one worker submitting IOs, and it limits its queue depth to 1.

i noticed that with his link. Again, hard to find Low QD numbers for SF. weird.

Originally Posted by Anvil

I don't think the have realized how bad/wrong those iometer test are.
Iirc it was the workstation, web and server test that were the worst.

They should update those test to show the actual number of outstanding IO's. (workers * outstanding IO's)

yes horrible. i was thoroughly confused when reading some of those results.

"Lurking" Since 1977

Jesus Saves, God Backs-Up

*I come to the news section to ban people, not read complaints.*-[XC]Gomeler

It is interesting that once the reserve space got to 1, the OS stopped complaining about the imminent failure of the SSD...

Based on what happened with the Samsung, I wonder if it would be worth trying a power-off intermission at this point. Say, power the SSD off for a week and see if it still works and MD5 checks after that time, before continuing the writes.

One thing that would have been nice to know about the Samsung is how much I could have written to it before its unpowered data retention went down to some amount (say, a week or a month). I'm guessing I wrote so much to it that the unpowered data retention was less than a week, maybe even only a couple days. For practical purposes, I'd think the minimum data retention anyone would want to risk would be a week or so. In that case, the amount that can be written to the SSD is probably going to be less than the amount that we measure when we write until we start getting write errors....

I think that deleting everything off the Force 3 and then putting it back won't make much of a difference in WRDelta.

Incidentally, the Mushkin peaked at 26 a couple days ago, and now is on it's way back down (it's currently at 21). If history is any indication, it should drop back down to 10 or 11, 12 eventually.

I haven't done moved the files back and forth, and I've not secure erased the drive. I have deleted the Mushkin and then performed fresh Windows installs on three separate occasions. That didn't seem to change anything either.

WRD will often go up or down frequently. I guessed that the Mushkin would peak, then drop again, and so far that looks to be the case, but nothing would really surprise me. Lots of the drive's behavior is inexplicable, but I will say that Win7 installs from a USB key are insanely fast on the Chronos D.

I could't be happier with the new Celeron/H67 setup. I have the case in my TV stand/component rack and connected to the TV via DVI->HDMI, so I can just switch inputs on the TV so see what's going on. But then I discovered this awesome remote desktop application for WebOS and my HP TouchPad (Splashtop Remote for WebOS/iOS/Android). It's works great, and I can do almost anything from it. I bought a TouchPad when they were $99 in the HP firesale and didn't have too much to do with it until now. I just keep the TP over by my main system so I can either see the system itself or have the TP to check in on the endurance rig. Of course, it's not as big of a deal if you're using a SSD that doesn't crash when you look at it wrong.

It remained at 79 throughout the move (from and to) but during the first loop it dropped to 78

Just out of curiosity
There are 94460 files on the drive, it took ~40 minutes to move the data to an HDD, it took 18 minutes to move it back.

Also, the first loop was pretty slow, looks like avg speed is almost back to normal.

Interesting. So based on observations from your drive and SymbiosVyse’s drive it seems that SF drives do not rotate static data, rather they rely on the user to change the static data, at which point they then try to limit wear on the most worn blocks.

Christopher, your drive seems to be an exception. Have you at any stage removed the static data?

Wear Range Delta continues to drop, but I'm a little surprised that the increase and decrease has happened so quickly.

It was 25 when I posted the update on the 29th day, but perhaps the difference between B1 = 11 and B1 = 21 is not so much when the Force 3 and F40-A are both given to high WRDs.

Besides the capacity difference, NAND/PE differences, there is also the matter of speed. Shouldn't faster drives be able to rotate static data more quickly than slower drives? The Chronos D is roughly 25% faster than the Force 3, and maybe over 2x the speed of the F40-A (I believe it was about 55MBs @ 46% [Application]).